[PATCH 3.10 072/103] nfsd4: remove lockowner when removing lock stateid

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

3.10-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx>

commit a1b8ff4c97b4375d21b6d6c45d75877303f61b3b upstream.

The nfsv4 state code has always assumed a one-to-one correspondance
between lock stateid's and lockowners even if it appears not to in some
places.

We may actually change that, but for now when FREE_STATEID releases a
lock stateid it also needs to release the parent lockowner.

Symptoms were a subsequent LOCK crashing in find_lockowner_str when it
calls same_lockowner_ino on a lockowner that unexpectedly has an empty
so_stateids list.

Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

---
 fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c |   11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -3599,9 +3599,16 @@ out:
 static __be32
 nfsd4_free_lock_stateid(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp)
 {
-	if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lockowner(stp->st_stateowner)))
+	struct nfs4_lockowner *lo = lockowner(stp->st_stateowner);
+
+	if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lo))
 		return nfserr_locks_held;
-	release_lock_stateid(stp);
+	/*
+	 * Currently there's a 1-1 lock stateid<->lockowner
+	 * correspondance, and we have to delete the lockowner when we
+	 * delete the lock stateid:
+	 */
+	unhash_lockowner(lo);
 	return nfs_ok;
 }
 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/